DFC
To convince Europe's Authorities and Experts one has to show that the rating is not simply a good idea but that the idea is sound from an operational IFR point of view.....i.e. you depart you enter IMC you remain IMC and find that the destination is below limits, you then perhaps shoot a second approach followerd by a diversion to the alternate where you hold and shoot a third approach (gettting tired by now) to a safe landing.
Good point, but shouldnt some responsibility remain with the pilot?
Do we have to regulate for every scenario?
A PPL grants you rights to fly aircraft you would be very unwise to fly without further instruction.
An IR grants you rights to fly to published minima, but should you do so if you are rusty?
An IMC rating grants you the rights you set out, but at the same time during training significant emphais is placed on the need for currency and development of skills.
I think because these aspects are emphasised the vast majority of IMC rating holders operate to their limitations. That is why the safety record of holders is so good.
On the other hand because some IR holders believe they are qualified to fly hard IFR in very poor weather they will be inclined to do so, when perhaps they should not.